Anycubic Photon

[Erock482]

Update, IT WORKED! Huzzah less parts to post process

[diezmon]

Update, IT WORKED! Huzzah less parts to post process

What'd you end up doing?

[Erock482]

Modifications to the model are this.

Increased thickness of the end walls
Decreased Thickness of the decking on the end platforms
extended floor that was printed in the main car body to include the Bolsters, adding some additional rigidity to the print.
added three additional cross bars from the bottom of the car wall to the top of the floor, these will be cut out after printing
increased wall thickness at the bottom portions of the walls up until a little above the floor, then taper to standard thickness just below the windows on the side walls.


there is still a slight variation. but not nearly as noticable as the previous iteration.

Alas the new gremlin is correcting the expansion and measurement inaccuracies. As fate has it I do have enough similar examples to gain a good amount of measurement data to compute an average.

Height wise, accuracy is damn near perfect. however width and length are about 6% too large. this error seems to be consitent to the printer, not just the model. a test print of a D&RGW high side gondola demonstrated a similar error in size in the length and width. Which is convinient for keeping things consistent. a slightly shrunk caboose is on the printer right now, we shall see what happens

[Chris333]

So how long till Micro Mark releases their PhotonLux for like $599?

[narrowminded]

Height wise, accuracy is damn near perfect. however width and length are about 6% too large. this error seems to be consitent to the printer, not just the model. a test print of a D&RGW high side gondola demonstrated a similar error in size in the length and width. Which is convinient for keeping things consistent. a slightly shrunk caboose is on the printer right now, we shall see what happens

I have experienced a problem in the X and Y planes but have attributed it to stray light and/ or resin characteristics.  It's a one time event for each face, not a percentage thing which would show a bigger error in a bigger part, smaller in a smaller part, following directly as a percentage, therefore corrected by a percentage.  I have corrected the error by adjusting the dimensions in those planes by .0025" to .003" per side. 

Example, two parallel walls that are supposed to finish at .030" thick in the x plane with a 2" span between them, coming in at .036" thick and a span of 1.994" inside and 2.006" outside.  Each face had grown .003", adding .006" to each of the finished dimensions, span between walls (2 faces) and outside wall as well as wall thickness (2 faces).  Then a 3" span or 1" span would carry the same .003" per wall error.  It was a fixed face thickness error that was occurring.  The fix was to reduce those dimensions by the amount of the error.  In my experience on my machine this was .0025" to .003" per face.

The Z axis doesn't do this because it is mechanically set by the mechanical action of the Z axis.

[Wutter]

Height wise, accuracy is damn near perfect. however width and length are about 6% too large. this error seems to be consitent to the printer, not just the model. a test print of a D&RGW high side gondola demonstrated a similar error in size in the length and width. Which is convinient for keeping things consistent. a slightly shrunk caboose is on the printer right now, we shall see what happens

I've experienced the exact same thing, I ended up scaling my model to exactly 94% when I was finished. I to get a specific hatch to fit, I had to print models at 100, 90, 95 92 and 94% to find out if the error was consistent. Because the scaling is in all directions this kind of messes with the Z height of the model a little bit, but since it is only 6% I could shim the difference. I also tried only scaling the model in XY and leaving it as is in Z, but it introduced some weird elongation especially when the models are printed at and angle to the bed.

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

[Erock482]

So how long till Micro Mark releases their PhotonLux for like $599?

Depends, will they be putting micromark stickers on the Standard or S model photon? 

Narrowminded, interesting result! While that may be a more accurate method for various components, simply scaling the entire car in my case is the least work intensive option.

Wutter, intersting that you too found 6% to be about the right correction. I'm using the chitubox slicer and if you uncheck the lock ratio button when scaling you can adjust each direction independently. So my Z stays at full value while I reduce the X and Y

EDIT: Snagged some comparison photos to show the difference that 6% scaling difference made. Gray Caboose is without adjustment, Un-painted green is with adjustment, painted car is a Blackstone Long Caboose

[ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ] [ Guests cannot view attachments ]